On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:42:48 +0100
Ben Noordhuis got an infinite number of monkeys to type out:
> There might be a small bug in unix/sdl_glimp.c, somewhere around line 660:
Holy crap. Line 559. You know the code that well??!!
Anhow, I see what you mean, but what would cause this bug to rear it's ugly
head so suddenly? And, now, I find out, on two different machines...
Weird.
I also noticed this in sdl_glimp.c:
if ((i % 4) == 1)
{ // reduce stencilbits
if (tstencilbits == 24)
tstencilbits = 16;
else if (tstencilbits == 16)
tstencilbits = 8;
else
tstencilbits = 0;
}
Now, that appears *before* the line of code you reference, if that matters
where it appears, I dunno ;-) ...and, in the term output I have this:
Using 4/4/4 Color bits, 16 depth, 0 stencil display.
and this:
PIXELFORMAT: color(16-bits) Z(16-bit) stencil(0-bits)
So it looks (to these clueless, weary eyes) like there's a problem even before
it gets to setting the sdlcolorbits to 8 (or 4)...wait, can that be right? So
seeing 'Using 8/8/8 Color bits' is normal? Because that may not be the problem
at all then, but rather the stencilbits, no?
Regadless you have no idea what it's like to wake up (ya, ya, I know, I was up
late fuxxoring around with *this*...) to a response like this. I really
appreciate all the suggestions, help, and, er, 'tolerance' of all who've
replied.
Heh. What's your first clue I'm addicted to this game? ;-)
--
JoeHill / RLU #282046
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zoidberg: That's where I'm meeting Uncle Zoid for lunch to discuss my Hollywood
dream. The next time you see me, don't be surprised if I've eaten.